This thread is a huge, multi-day proof that people do not agree that
this is a "reasonable" interpretation.

Advertising

So far I've seen one very vocal person who disgrees, and
maybe one other who isn't sure.

This proposal only makes even a little
bit of sense if you imagine list comprehensions

[*t for a in it1 for b in it2 for c in it3 ... for t in itN]
completely unrolled into a list display:
[*t, *t, *t, *t, ... ]
but who does that? Why would you reason about your list comps like that?

Many people do, and it's a perfectly valid way to think
about them. They're meant to admit a declarative reading;
that's the reason they exist in the first place.
The expansion in terms of for-loops and appends is just
*one* way to describe the current semantics. It's not
written on stone tablets brought down from a mountain.
Any other way of thinking about it that gives the same
result is equally valid.

magically adds an second invisible for-loop to your
list comps:

You might as well say that the existing * in a list
display magically inserts a for-loop into it. You can
think of it that way if you want, but you don't have
to.

it is intentionally
prohibited because it doesn't make sense in the context of list comps.